Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
May 12th 2006, 7:33 pm
#76
Fighting my corner
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 11,948
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by kiwichild
And i'd be interested in seeing the evidence of these claims, especially the latter case.
Dredging up unrelated stories of some shady or sinister individuals who happen to have some clout within a particular union organisation has no relevance to the original topic. Bad apples are found in all areas of society. Just because they exist does not make the sector they were found in all tarred with the same brush.
Dredging up unrelated stories of some shady or sinister individuals who happen to have some clout within a particular union organisation has no relevance to the original topic. Bad apples are found in all areas of society. Just because they exist does not make the sector they were found in all tarred with the same brush.
You want sources? OK, try these on for size...
Evidence of civil and criminal offences within the building unions:
March 2003 – After an 18-month investigation, the government releases 22 volumes of the Cole Report, the product of a AU$60 million royal commission examining the AU$40 billion-per-year building industry.
The so-called Cole Commission, headed by former justice Terence Cole, identifies 392 instances of civil misdemeanors.
A final volume of the Cole report remains confidential, but reportedly contains information on 26 alleged criminal cases, most of which deal with crimes by union officials that range from extortion to intimidation to perjury.
The incident documented by the West Australian newspaper, in which a union member was offered a bribe (and also intimidated) to withdraw from the union leadership race:
I remember asking the minister a question early last year about section 72 - I refer to clause 150 of the Bill - which outlaws threats of violence, injury, punishment, damage, loss and any form of intimidation to induce the candidature or withdrawal of candidature in relation to elections.
I stated that this section was deficient because it does not make the offering of an inducement or bribe to withdraw candidature an offence.
I referred to the circumstances of the previous year and the allegations made in the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union bribery scandal in which the assistant secretary of that union, Joe McDonald, was secretly taped offering Terry McParland a bribe to withdraw his nomination against union boss Kevin Reynolds.
I thought the Government would have taken this opportunity to close this loophole. An investigation into this matter found that the offering of a bribe was not outlawed in either the state or the federal jurisdiction.
Some findings of the Cole Royal Commission:
The construction industry in WA was described by the Royal Commission as being 'marred by unlawful and inappropriate conduct', with 'a culture of fear, intimidation, coercion and industrial unrest'.
The Royal Commission made 230 findings of unlawful conduct in WA, the majority of which were against CFMEU officials and organisers for intimidation and threats of violence, breaches of FOA, secondary boycott and right of entry provisions, trespass and interference.
CFMEU officials Kevin Reynolds and Joe McDonald are cited as repeat offenders.
In regard to the blackmail money (passed off as "training expenses") which the unions forced Westfield to cough up under threat threat of union disruption:
Some tracings are of particular interest, for example the payment of $10,000 made by Westfield on 7 September 1999.
While the cheque was made payable to the CFMEU WA Branch Welshpool Training Centre and the payment purported to be a donation to the Training Centre, the moneys were actually banked into the WABLPPU Business Management Account.
Also of interest is the fact that not all payments purporting to relate to specialised training are actually lodged to the specialised training account.
This contradicts evidence given by Reynolds in which he stated ‘[e]very cent of specialised training, every cent, currently sits in a bank account in the name of specialised training and will be used for training’.
I could go on like this for some considerable time. How much do you want to see?
May 12th 2006, 8:26 pm
#77
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,551
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by Vash the Stampede
kiwichild, the "sinister individuals" in question were high-profile union leaders. One of them was Kevin Reynolds - Secretary of the CFMEU. The cases were well documented; I don't know how you could possibly have missed them.
You want sources? OK, try these on for size...
Evidence of civil and criminal offences within the building unions:
March 2003 – After an 18-month investigation, the government releases 22 volumes of the Cole Report, the product of a AU$60 million royal commission examining the AU$40 billion-per-year building industry.
The so-called Cole Commission, headed by former justice Terence Cole, identifies 392 instances of civil misdemeanors.
A final volume of the Cole report remains confidential, but reportedly contains information on 26 alleged criminal cases, most of which deal with crimes by union officials that range from extortion to intimidation to perjury.
Source.
The incident documented by the West Australian newspaper, in which a union member was offered a bribe (and also intimidated) to withdraw from the union leadership race:
I remember asking the minister a question early last year about section 72 - I refer to clause 150 of the Bill - which outlaws threats of violence, injury, punishment, damage, loss and any form of intimidation to induce the candidature or withdrawal of candidature in relation to elections.
I stated that this section was deficient because it does not make the offering of an inducement or bribe to withdraw candidature an offence.
I referred to the circumstances of the previous year and the allegations made in the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union bribery scandal in which the assistant secretary of that union, Joe McDonald, was secretly taped offering Terry McParland a bribe to withdraw his nomination against union boss Kevin Reynolds.
I thought the Government would have taken this opportunity to close this loophole. An investigation into this matter found that the offering of a bribe was not outlawed in either the state or the federal jurisdiction.
Source.
Some findings of the Cole Royal Commission:
The construction industry in WA was described by the Royal Commission as being 'marred by unlawful and inappropriate conduct', with 'a culture of fear, intimidation, coercion and industrial unrest'.
The Royal Commission made 230 findings of unlawful conduct in WA, the majority of which were against CFMEU officials and organisers for intimidation and threats of violence, breaches of FOA, secondary boycott and right of entry provisions, trespass and interference.
CFMEU officials Kevin Reynolds and Joe McDonald are cited as repeat offenders.
Source.
In regard to the blackmail money (passed off as "training expenses") which the unions forced Westfield to cough up under threat threat of union disruption:
Some tracings are of particular interest, for example the payment of $10,000 made by Westfield on 7 September 1999.
While the cheque was made payable to the CFMEU WA Branch Welshpool Training Centre and the payment purported to be a donation to the Training Centre, the moneys were actually banked into the WABLPPU Business Management Account.
Also of interest is the fact that not all payments purporting to relate to specialised training are actually lodged to the specialised training account.
This contradicts evidence given by Reynolds in which he stated ‘[e]very cent of specialised training, every cent, currently sits in a bank account in the name of specialised training and will be used for training’.
Source. (See page 37, paragraph 48.)
I could go on like this for some considerable time. How much do you want to see?
You want sources? OK, try these on for size...
Evidence of civil and criminal offences within the building unions:
March 2003 – After an 18-month investigation, the government releases 22 volumes of the Cole Report, the product of a AU$60 million royal commission examining the AU$40 billion-per-year building industry.
The so-called Cole Commission, headed by former justice Terence Cole, identifies 392 instances of civil misdemeanors.
A final volume of the Cole report remains confidential, but reportedly contains information on 26 alleged criminal cases, most of which deal with crimes by union officials that range from extortion to intimidation to perjury.
The incident documented by the West Australian newspaper, in which a union member was offered a bribe (and also intimidated) to withdraw from the union leadership race:
I remember asking the minister a question early last year about section 72 - I refer to clause 150 of the Bill - which outlaws threats of violence, injury, punishment, damage, loss and any form of intimidation to induce the candidature or withdrawal of candidature in relation to elections.
I stated that this section was deficient because it does not make the offering of an inducement or bribe to withdraw candidature an offence.
I referred to the circumstances of the previous year and the allegations made in the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union bribery scandal in which the assistant secretary of that union, Joe McDonald, was secretly taped offering Terry McParland a bribe to withdraw his nomination against union boss Kevin Reynolds.
I thought the Government would have taken this opportunity to close this loophole. An investigation into this matter found that the offering of a bribe was not outlawed in either the state or the federal jurisdiction.
Some findings of the Cole Royal Commission:
The construction industry in WA was described by the Royal Commission as being 'marred by unlawful and inappropriate conduct', with 'a culture of fear, intimidation, coercion and industrial unrest'.
The Royal Commission made 230 findings of unlawful conduct in WA, the majority of which were against CFMEU officials and organisers for intimidation and threats of violence, breaches of FOA, secondary boycott and right of entry provisions, trespass and interference.
CFMEU officials Kevin Reynolds and Joe McDonald are cited as repeat offenders.
In regard to the blackmail money (passed off as "training expenses") which the unions forced Westfield to cough up under threat threat of union disruption:
Some tracings are of particular interest, for example the payment of $10,000 made by Westfield on 7 September 1999.
While the cheque was made payable to the CFMEU WA Branch Welshpool Training Centre and the payment purported to be a donation to the Training Centre, the moneys were actually banked into the WABLPPU Business Management Account.
Also of interest is the fact that not all payments purporting to relate to specialised training are actually lodged to the specialised training account.
This contradicts evidence given by Reynolds in which he stated ‘[e]very cent of specialised training, every cent, currently sits in a bank account in the name of specialised training and will be used for training’.
I could go on like this for some considerable time. How much do you want to see?
I go back to my earlier statement about bad apples. Just because one or two may exist in positions of power in a couple of unions, does not a case against unions make. It makes a case against those individuals only. Otherwise, following your logic we would have a situation whereby, for example, corrupt police officers would lead to the deregistration of the police force.
Smashing unions isn't the answer. Employers and governments working with them is. The principles of unionism remain sound, as does the idea of working together to achieve mutual benefits for all parties.
May 12th 2006, 8:50 pm
#78
visa granted 16/5/06
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 461
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by Cam1977
Okay, I should have said ‘low-skilled labour market’. If you create a high enough level of unemployment, then workers aren’t in a position to change jobs if they’re being treated like sh!t. People think high unemployment was an unfortunate byproduct of Thatcher’s attacks on the unions – in fact it was an integral part of the strategy. And I know you’ll think this is crap but I believe that the raft of social problems now facing the UK (poverty levels, drug and alcohol abuse, crime, teenage pregnancies) are all part of Thatcher’s legacy. The UK has a much worse record in those areas than the rest of Europe. I accept that Thatcher’s ‘reforms’ benefited most Brits, but it also created a large underclass.
It’s not Indonesia that that is exploiting the workers. I mentioned ‘GAP’ T-shirts – GAP is a US company and you don’t think they’d do the same to their American workers if they were given half the chance? Indonesia just happens to be a poor country which is desperate for foreign investment, so it is in no position to protect its workers.
I totally agree. Unions need to be kept in line, just like employers. But the answer is to have a balance rather than putting all power in the hands of the bosses.
It’s not Indonesia that that is exploiting the workers. I mentioned ‘GAP’ T-shirts – GAP is a US company and you don’t think they’d do the same to their American workers if they were given half the chance? Indonesia just happens to be a poor country which is desperate for foreign investment, so it is in no position to protect its workers.
I totally agree. Unions need to be kept in line, just like employers. But the answer is to have a balance rather than putting all power in the hands of the bosses.
You speak my language, and very well said. Thank you
May 12th 2006, 9:16 pm
#79
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by kiwichild
Okay OZTennis's link that relates to this story and his and your questions was first post on page 5. Here it is again. It's not just me who makes such claims!
http://bendigo.yourguide.com.au/deta...ews&m=5&y=2006
http://bendigo.yourguide.com.au/deta...ews&m=5&y=2006
So why did it take FOUR shop stewards to deliver the cash and why did they have to go and write a press release at the same time. It may seem a trivial 20 minutes but normally these people work in teams, so one miner missing may hold up a team of 10 so they would be unable to start the shift (and union demarcation rules mean no-one else is allowed to fill in with someone elses job). Now I am surmising here but if they worked for different teams that would be 4 teams of 10 i.e. 40 men at 20 mins per man = 800 mins. In other words the company would have lost over 13 man hours production because of this.
May 12th 2006, 9:24 pm
#80
visa granted 16/5/06
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 461
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by NedKelly
So why did it take FOUR shop stewards to deliver the cash and why did they have to go and write a press release at the same time. It may seem a trivial 20 minutes but normally these people work in teams, so one miner missing may hold up a team of 10 so they would be unable to start the shift (and union demarcation rules mean no-one else is allowed to fill in with someone elses job). Now I am surmising here but if they worked for different teams that would be 4 teams of 10 i.e. 40 men at 20 mins per man = 800 mins. In other words the company would have lost over 13 man hours production because of this.
No, the company lost a worker, a woman lost her breadwinner and children lost their dad. Thats it.
May 12th 2006, 9:31 pm
#81
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by soonbethere
No, the company lost a worker, a woman lost her breadwinner and children lost their dad. Thats it.
May 12th 2006, 9:49 pm
#82
Fighting my corner
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 11,948
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by kiwichild
Well individuals who have a prima facie case against them established involving corrupt and illegal activities should be formally charged and if convicted, lose their positions within the union heirarchy.
In August 2004, Victoria’s Court of Appeal sentenced Craig Johnston, the former Victorian State Secretary of the AMWU, to a minimum sentence of nine months imprisonment. The charges were the result of organised rampages through two businesses in 2001 because of an industrial dispute.
The raids caused over $43,000 worth of damage to property and involved balaclava-clad unionists upending filing cabinets, smashing computers, tearing fittings from walls, spraying a pregnant woman with a fire extinguisher and photographing, threatening and abusing employees, some of whom, not surprisingly, had to obtain counselling.
The abuse by Mr Johnston was reported as being so violent that while attempting to take a photograph of one of the managers, purportedly to hang on a “shame board” for the “scabs”, he shouted “I know who you are, you are a _ _ _ _ing dead man”.
He repeated the threat adding that he knew where the manager lived.
[...]
Notwithstanding such a clear example of thuggery, Mr Johnston continues to enjoy the support of prominent union officials in the industry.
Those who have spoken out in support of Craig Johnston include Martin Kingham (CFMEU State Secretary Victoria), Earl Setches (CEPU — Plumbing Division National Secretary and Victoria State Secretary), Peter Tighe (CEPU National Secretary) and Kevin Reynolds (CFMEU WA State Secretary).
So Kevin Reynolds openly supports a union thug who was convicted of orchestrating violent raids upon two businesses.
What a lovely man that Mr Reynolds is, to be sure. So principled! So upright! So law-abiding!
By the way I don't recall Reynolds or McDonald being convicted in a court of law over any of this do you?
This wouldn't be surprising, since Reynolds is known to be very good at what he does. No union thug with an ounce of sense is going to leave behind any sort of evidence trail which might be traced back to him, are they? Everything is done through delegation.
The McParland scandal is a case in point. And it was, may I remind you, recorded in full by a couple of reporters for the West Australian. It actually happened. A transcript of the conversation was made. Kevin Reynold's deputies were caught red-handed.
Please don't tell me that you're actually sticking up for Kevin Reynolds. That really would be too much.
I go back to my earlier statement about bad apples. Just because one or two may exist in positions of power in a couple of unions, does not a case against unions make. It makes a case against those individuals only. Otherwise, following your logic we would have a situation whereby, for example, corrupt police officers would lead to the deregistration of the police force.
Australia's union doesn't just have a handful of bad apples; it has masses of great big reeking barrels stacked to the ceiling and dripping with the liquid byproducts of rotten fruit.
Read the Cole Royal Commission and wake up to the fact that unionism in Australia is not some sort of idealistic fairyland in which the best and fairest principles of Socialism are stridently upheld by good and decent men who have their fellow citizens' best interests at heart.
Smashing unions isn't the answer.
But the sad fact of the matter is that most of Australia's unions are far too powerful, and are far too quick to employ methods which are unethical, illegal, or both.
The Cole Royal Commission proved this beyond any shadow of a doubt. I strongly suggest that you read it. While you're doing that, spare a throught for the hundreds of people and businesses who have been ruined, intimidated, attacked, framed, and otherwise damaged by union thuggery.
Employers and governments working with them is. The principles of unionism remain sound, as does the idea of working together to achieve mutual benefits for all parties.
Last edited by Vash the Stampede; May 12th 2006 at 9:54 pm.
May 12th 2006, 10:17 pm
#83
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by kiwichild
Actually I am in my final year of a social sciences degree, majoring in community studies. minoring in children and family studies.
In my course I had studied, social analysis, comparative social policy and politics. I also hold a diploma in mental health work.
That help give you a better picture?
In my course I had studied, social analysis, comparative social policy and politics. I also hold a diploma in mental health work.
That help give you a better picture?
May 13th 2006, 5:35 am
#84
Sanctuary Lakes
Joined: May 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 17
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Hi all,
I was a very senior Manager in the UK before coming to Oz in June last year. I started on the shop floor at the beginning of the 80's, lived through the Thatcher and Scargill years and saw the huge changes between the Unions and Management up to last year.
I have never taken advantage of anyone who has worked for me and in the last 3-4 Companies have had a brilliant relationship with the Union. I believe they have a place in industry and when we all work together, it is the benefit of all parties. We have created great relationships based on honesty and trust, we certainly haven't always agreed and have often had huge disagreements but because we have always treated each other with respect have been able to work through some difficult times. This would never have happened in the 80's, we spent more time fighting each other than we did fighting overseas competition. The union in the UK has realised this and has moved on to a much better place.
I was in the Aerospace Industry during 9/11 and I had to close a site and reduce the total amount of employees by half (450) I had 1 case go to tribunal, treated everyone with respect but I had to save the Company to ensure employment for the other 450 employees. We got through this, remained on friendly terms and I was able to let a lot of people come back to the Company as the industry recovered. In fact almost everyone who was made redundant would have come back. I was certainly not a Thatcherite but that period has allowed Management and Union work closer against common goals.
So I came to Oz in June, started in a senior position with a large national Company in Oz but I feel as though I have gone back into the 80's. The unions want to fight the management instead of the Chinese manufacturing threat, will disagree for the sake of it and don't really want to work together. I think this is a shame, our goals and objectives should be the same....safe working environment...fair days pay for a fair days work......job security....growth of the company... and to do this the company needs to be competitive and make some profit.
I think that the UK is to blame for this because a lot of the problems came from UK immigrants that only remember the bad old ways and haven't seen the changes in the UK. I don't know how things will change but I will do my bit to work with my Union and workforce to develop values in the business based on honesty, trust and respect. I hope I can make a difference in my Company.
This weeks the union all went away to decide on what action they will take when we implement the new laws, the fact is, we are doing nothing. We have no intention to treat people any differently and we have bigger fish to fry anyway. But this shows that the unions here think that the management are trying find ways to treat them poorly, but the truth is, is that most companies are simply not as devious as what the unions seem to think. They simply give us too much credit . I'm not naive enough to think that all management is the same but I think they are often given a bum rap and when the union call us, we often don't publicly reply, so the public only get one side of the story. In most instances we do not get into a slanging match, so we are often seen to be worst than what we are.
I'm not an academic, I grew up on a council estate in Hull. Started life as an apprentice fitter and made good. I remember my roots and know the best way to work is as partners. I really hope that things start to change in Oz, otherwise we will lose a lot of our manufacturing to China and that is in no ones interest
Regards
Hector
I was a very senior Manager in the UK before coming to Oz in June last year. I started on the shop floor at the beginning of the 80's, lived through the Thatcher and Scargill years and saw the huge changes between the Unions and Management up to last year.
I have never taken advantage of anyone who has worked for me and in the last 3-4 Companies have had a brilliant relationship with the Union. I believe they have a place in industry and when we all work together, it is the benefit of all parties. We have created great relationships based on honesty and trust, we certainly haven't always agreed and have often had huge disagreements but because we have always treated each other with respect have been able to work through some difficult times. This would never have happened in the 80's, we spent more time fighting each other than we did fighting overseas competition. The union in the UK has realised this and has moved on to a much better place.
I was in the Aerospace Industry during 9/11 and I had to close a site and reduce the total amount of employees by half (450) I had 1 case go to tribunal, treated everyone with respect but I had to save the Company to ensure employment for the other 450 employees. We got through this, remained on friendly terms and I was able to let a lot of people come back to the Company as the industry recovered. In fact almost everyone who was made redundant would have come back. I was certainly not a Thatcherite but that period has allowed Management and Union work closer against common goals.
So I came to Oz in June, started in a senior position with a large national Company in Oz but I feel as though I have gone back into the 80's. The unions want to fight the management instead of the Chinese manufacturing threat, will disagree for the sake of it and don't really want to work together. I think this is a shame, our goals and objectives should be the same....safe working environment...fair days pay for a fair days work......job security....growth of the company... and to do this the company needs to be competitive and make some profit.
I think that the UK is to blame for this because a lot of the problems came from UK immigrants that only remember the bad old ways and haven't seen the changes in the UK. I don't know how things will change but I will do my bit to work with my Union and workforce to develop values in the business based on honesty, trust and respect. I hope I can make a difference in my Company.
This weeks the union all went away to decide on what action they will take when we implement the new laws, the fact is, we are doing nothing. We have no intention to treat people any differently and we have bigger fish to fry anyway. But this shows that the unions here think that the management are trying find ways to treat them poorly, but the truth is, is that most companies are simply not as devious as what the unions seem to think. They simply give us too much credit . I'm not naive enough to think that all management is the same but I think they are often given a bum rap and when the union call us, we often don't publicly reply, so the public only get one side of the story. In most instances we do not get into a slanging match, so we are often seen to be worst than what we are.
I'm not an academic, I grew up on a council estate in Hull. Started life as an apprentice fitter and made good. I remember my roots and know the best way to work is as partners. I really hope that things start to change in Oz, otherwise we will lose a lot of our manufacturing to China and that is in no ones interest
Regards
Hector
May 13th 2006, 5:41 am
#85
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,551
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by NedKelly
I think that Social Science is definately NOT a science in any way. Most of the students studying this subject don't understand basic maths let alone statistics. It is an excuse for trendy lefty liberal fruity academics who have never done a days work to spout their Lenist/Marxist ideas and fornicate with the impresionable girls who attend their lectures.
Your comments have let all and sundry see you for who you are: an undereducated, ill-informed, over opinionated baffoon who believes any bullshit they are spun if it sounds right to them, doesn't require any critical or analytical thinking and blames those they despise (without need for a logical assessment or reasoning).
God help Australia if you are an example of what the country is letting in thesedays!
May 13th 2006, 5:51 am
#86
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,551
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by Hector
Hi all,
I was a very senior Manager in the UK before coming to Oz in June last year. I started on the shop floor at the beginning of the 80's, lived through the Thatcher and Scargill years and saw the huge changes between the Unions and Management up to last year.
I have never taken advantage of anyone who has worked for me and in the last 3-4 Companies have had a brilliant relationship with the Union. I believe they have a place in industry and when we all work together, it is the benefit of all parties. We have created great relationships based on honesty and trust, we certainly haven't always agreed and have often had huge disagreements but because we have always treated each other with respect have been able to work through some difficult times. This would never have happened in the 80's, we spent more time fighting each other than we did fighting overseas competition. The union in the UK has realised this and has moved on to a much better place.
I was in the Aerospace Industry during 9/11 and I had to close a site and reduce the total amount of employees by half (450) I had 1 case go to tribunal, treated everyone with respect but I had to save the Company to ensure employment for the other 450 employees. We got through this, remained on friendly terms and I was able to let a lot of people come back to the Company as the industry recovered. In fact almost everyone who was made redundant would have come back. I was certainly not a Thatcherite but that period has allowed Management and Union work closer against common goals.
So I came to Oz in June, started in a senior position with a large national Company in Oz but I feel as though I have gone back into the 80's. The unions want to fight the management instead of the Chinese manufacturing threat, will disagree for the sake of it and don't really want to work together. I think this is a shame, our goals and objectives should be the same....safe working environment...fair days pay for a fair days work......job security....growth of the company... and to do this the company needs to be competitive and make some profit.
I think that the UK is to blame for this because a lot of the problems came from UK immigrants that only remember the bad old ways and haven't seen the changes in the UK. I don't know how things will change but I will do my bit to work with my Union and workforce to develop values in the business based on honesty, trust and respect. I hope I can make a difference in my Company.
This weeks the union all went away to decide on what action they will take when we implement the new laws, the fact is, we are doing nothing. We have no intention to treat people any differently and we have bigger fish to fry anyway. But this shows that the unions here think that the management are trying find ways to treat them poorly, but the truth is, is that most companies are simply not as devious as what the unions seem to think. They simply give us too much credit . I'm not naive enough to think that all management is the same but I think they are often given a bum rap and when the union call us, we often don't publicly reply, so the public only get one side of the story. In most instances we do not get into a slanging match, so we are often seen to be worst than what we are.
I'm not an academic, I grew up on a council estate in Hull. Started life as an apprentice fitter and made good. I remember my roots and know the best way to work is as partners. I really hope that things start to change in Oz, otherwise we will lose a lot of our manufacturing to China and that is in no ones interest
Regards
Hector
I was a very senior Manager in the UK before coming to Oz in June last year. I started on the shop floor at the beginning of the 80's, lived through the Thatcher and Scargill years and saw the huge changes between the Unions and Management up to last year.
I have never taken advantage of anyone who has worked for me and in the last 3-4 Companies have had a brilliant relationship with the Union. I believe they have a place in industry and when we all work together, it is the benefit of all parties. We have created great relationships based on honesty and trust, we certainly haven't always agreed and have often had huge disagreements but because we have always treated each other with respect have been able to work through some difficult times. This would never have happened in the 80's, we spent more time fighting each other than we did fighting overseas competition. The union in the UK has realised this and has moved on to a much better place.
I was in the Aerospace Industry during 9/11 and I had to close a site and reduce the total amount of employees by half (450) I had 1 case go to tribunal, treated everyone with respect but I had to save the Company to ensure employment for the other 450 employees. We got through this, remained on friendly terms and I was able to let a lot of people come back to the Company as the industry recovered. In fact almost everyone who was made redundant would have come back. I was certainly not a Thatcherite but that period has allowed Management and Union work closer against common goals.
So I came to Oz in June, started in a senior position with a large national Company in Oz but I feel as though I have gone back into the 80's. The unions want to fight the management instead of the Chinese manufacturing threat, will disagree for the sake of it and don't really want to work together. I think this is a shame, our goals and objectives should be the same....safe working environment...fair days pay for a fair days work......job security....growth of the company... and to do this the company needs to be competitive and make some profit.
I think that the UK is to blame for this because a lot of the problems came from UK immigrants that only remember the bad old ways and haven't seen the changes in the UK. I don't know how things will change but I will do my bit to work with my Union and workforce to develop values in the business based on honesty, trust and respect. I hope I can make a difference in my Company.
This weeks the union all went away to decide on what action they will take when we implement the new laws, the fact is, we are doing nothing. We have no intention to treat people any differently and we have bigger fish to fry anyway. But this shows that the unions here think that the management are trying find ways to treat them poorly, but the truth is, is that most companies are simply not as devious as what the unions seem to think. They simply give us too much credit . I'm not naive enough to think that all management is the same but I think they are often given a bum rap and when the union call us, we often don't publicly reply, so the public only get one side of the story. In most instances we do not get into a slanging match, so we are often seen to be worst than what we are.
I'm not an academic, I grew up on a council estate in Hull. Started life as an apprentice fitter and made good. I remember my roots and know the best way to work is as partners. I really hope that things start to change in Oz, otherwise we will lose a lot of our manufacturing to China and that is in no ones interest
Regards
Hector
There has been a history over the last 10 or so years of employees getting shafted, and now this is even more so. In WA for instance, worker's compensation is a sad joke and a worker can spends years in the courts and end up with nothing but a legal bill, or else take a pittance, even though they might have lost their capacity to work again, and therefore lost years of potential income.
May 13th 2006, 6:44 am
#87
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by kiwichild
maths has nothing to do with it, and statistics doesnt become any sort of issue until masters level.
Your comments have let all and sundry see you for who you are: an undereducated, ill-informed, over opinionated baffoon who believes any bullshit they are spun if it sounds right to them, doesn't require any critical or analytical thinking and blames those they despise (without need for a logical assessment or reasoning).
God help Australia if you are an example of what the country is letting in thesedays!
Your comments have let all and sundry see you for who you are: an undereducated, ill-informed, over opinionated baffoon who believes any bullshit they are spun if it sounds right to them, doesn't require any critical or analytical thinking and blames those they despise (without need for a logical assessment or reasoning).
God help Australia if you are an example of what the country is letting in thesedays!
May 13th 2006, 6:48 am
#88
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by Hector
Hi all, ....
The way the union rep at Beaconsfield keeps going on about the company failure to address safety you would think he wanted the mine closed for good.
Why do a good deal of the Union agitators you see in the Australian news speak with Scottish/Northern England accents?
May 13th 2006, 6:59 am
#89
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by kiwichild
There has been a history over the last 10 or so years of employees getting shafted, and now this is even more so. In WA for instance, worker's compensation is a sad joke and a worker can spends years in the courts and end up with nothing but a legal bill, or else take a pittance, even though they might have lost their capacity to work again, and therefore lost years of potential income.
May 13th 2006, 5:10 pm
#90
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,551
Re: Union Officials Pay Docked As They Donate To Dead Miner's Widow
Originally Posted by NedKelly
NO MATHS. - Thats proves my point. It's not a science. It's one of those useless subjects people do when they can't find a real subject to study. When I did my degree we used to walk paste the Social "Science" block on the way to the labs. Generally there were an abundance of women in long flowery dresses wearing sandles sitting on the grass chatting.
The emphasis is on the social, eg the relationship between people, politics and power and how society is influenced by them. many advancements in a range of sub/related areas such as education and child development and protection owe their deeper understanding to the canons of social science research.